wietefras
Well-Known Member
Sorry, but that really is just marketing nonsense
The new QB 648 Diablo from Horticulture Lighting Group
- Thread starter lukio
- Start date
Does this mean that the SPD chart for the individual diablo qbs is wrong? With that blue spike that goes to the top of the graph? Anybody?
Thanks.
pulpoinspace
Well-Known Member
idk but i think it looks about right. it is mostly 4000k white diodes. the rspec boards are 3500k white thats why they have less blue.
end_of_the_tunnel
Well-Known Member
HLG Stephen talks a little about how competitors push the µmol/j numbers up by using higher Kelvin cct in their products. Around the 1 hour mark.
For contrast we could look at this masterpiece by SANLIGHT. I wonder what their µmol/j figure is?
For contrast we could look at this masterpiece by SANLIGHT. I wonder what their µmol/j figure is?
wietefras
Well-Known Member
Lol yeah he knows how to fudge the numbers. But then they say: "Yield is na gonna be thure"
So yes, don't be fooled my manufacturers who sneakily try to increase their numbers knowing that there will be no yield coming from it. Especially by manufacturers who lament this practice by other manufacturers and then do it themselves!
That chart for Fluence is their greenhouse light though. So, also fake news. For indoor growing Fluence uses PhysioSpec Indoor™ spectrum and that is more properly red biased.
Still a tad too blue I would say, but much better.
Lumatek Zeus 600W Pro adds a lot more red to the compensate for the blue in the white base:
So yes, don't be fooled my manufacturers who sneakily try to increase their numbers knowing that there will be no yield coming from it. Especially by manufacturers who lament this practice by other manufacturers and then do it themselves!
That chart for Fluence is their greenhouse light though. So, also fake news. For indoor growing Fluence uses PhysioSpec Indoor™ spectrum and that is more properly red biased.
Still a tad too blue I would say, but much better.
Lumatek Zeus 600W Pro adds a lot more red to the compensate for the blue in the white base:
end_of_the_tunnel
Well-Known Member
The ones I posted above were from 3rd party reports. With exception of SANLIGHT. Yours are derived from promotional literature, that could be outdated or superseded by component change.
I guess anything is possible, but don't think a professional laboratory would want their name associated with spurious or inaccurate results.
Don't even mention Lumatek, until they publish reputable third party lab report. Simply not in same league of manufacturer.
HLG is damned if they do, and damned if they don't. Can't please everyone all the time. Maybe the Diablo is partly aimed at appealing to the commercial market, where paper numbers appeal?
I can post the other Fluence bar light result from the same third party source. Current offerings from them in fanboy bar light form factor are 2p spectrum, and 2i spectrum. And those are exactly what Growers House got test reports for. Current and available product. WYSIWYG.
As you can see 2p is in fact the warmer of the two. Hence the reason I placed in post #304
Thanks.
If you compare the relative intensity of the hlg 650r light lab test spd chart (that you just shared) to the spd chart on the hlg website the blue peak is much higher. Looks like "7.5" on the light lab, versus "9.8" on the hlg site.
Am I missing something? I thought what I just heard from Stephen is that the spd chart on the hlg website is completely wrong...
So is it? And is the lighting lab inc. test you just shared correct then?
That would make a pretty big difference...
Thanks anyone.
end_of_the_tunnel
Well-Known Member
Think its historical with led based grow lights. Very early days of experimentation were dominated by monos.
wietefras
Well-Known Member
Could be, however Fluence specifically mention different SPD
's and the one posted matches exactly with their greenhouse report and not the PhysioSpec one.
Either way, it's not so much relevant if is also among the photon number inflaters. The beauty of that interview is that it's clear why there is so much blue in the spectrum and that people should not buy those lights because it's abundantly clear that it's nothing but a marketing ploy.
wietefras
Well-Known Member
Actually "full spectrum" is term made up when led light manufacturers were using only red and blue leds. Some manufacturers started adding other wavelengths to fill up the gap between blue and red (sometimes also adding UV and infrared) and called their lights full spectrum.
Calling white led light "full spectrum" really isn't very common. Where did you see that?
Piper84
Well-Known Member
This is from op of this thread very first post
Piper84
Well-Known Member
See above quoted from op
end_of_the_tunnel
Well-Known Member
Keyword trigger for me is "efficiency". What else could a manufacturer do? Have to cater for the efficiency snobs. Seems many were happy with Rspec. Logical to offer options for all comers. Thens theres the ones not satisfied. Plenty of choice out there.
pulpoinspace
Well-Known Member
one has relative intensity on the Y axis and the other has normalized power
Last edited:
X6xsilverx6X
Well-Known Member
Could be that the chart on the website the one supplied by Samsung? Which is why it could be wrong... remember what they did with the data sheet. Either way I didn’t catch that until after you mentioned it
Ah, I didn't notice that. I don't know what the difference is though either, hah.
I'd wanna know if that spd on the left is correct. And I guess I'll see if I can find out what "normalized power" is.
Could be I'm wrong - as someone just pointed out that the graphs are actually 'different'. I didn't catch anything then I guess, I thought that's what was being referenced when Stephen said the datasheet was wrong. But I duno now.
pulpoinspace
Well-Known Member
i was reading a thread on this exact topic the other day is why i noticed. i have no idea how to find that thread. might even be this one. but someone will shed light on this in a minute haha.